New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, AUGUST 4.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4795, 4 August 1876, Page 2

New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, AUGUST 4.

During the first half-hour in which ho spoke last night, Sir George Grey directed himself to two points. First, that he was not responsible for having been born in the United Kingdom ; and secondly, that the Constitution of New Zealand, as it has long existed, was and is a horrible monster. As to the first point, doubtless the United Kingdom will be quite as ready to disavow any responsibility in ..the matter as is Sir George Grey himself. As to the second, the fervid defences of the Constitution which he has so frequently made, seem somewhat irreconcileable with his present utterances. From these two points he jumped, in a rather unconnected manner, to his separation resolutions, and, it is pleasant for the sake of candor to notice, in vulgar words “ lot the cat out of the bag.” He admitted most truly (though unintentionally) that the resolutions came solely from the selfish and discontented portions of Auckland and Otago, which have combined to form the Opposition he heads. We have said that his admission must be regarded with pleasure, for it will show the rest of the colony what his scheme for separation really means—the sacrifice of all national interests and progress of every kind, for the sake of a couple of centres of population at either end of the 1 colony. . ' : Of course it would have been impossible for Sir George Grey to have made his speech without making personal attacks on the Premier and Dr. Poteen; indeed, the name of the latter gentleman, to use an old simile, has apparently the same effect upon Sir George Grey as the, exhibition of a red rag has on a bull. His attacks consisted mainly of that bathos which forms an integral part of his parliamentary eloquence, and consequently produced laughter, more especially when ho drew a fanciful picture of the starvation which prevailed in New Zealand whilst Sir Jueius' Vogee was at Home. As a matter of fact, no people could have been more generally prosperous and free from starvation than the people of this colony for the last two or three years. It was as well that Sir George undertook to show how he intended to preserve the unity of the colony at the same time that ho destroyed it. Yet, except to truly testhetic souls, his arguments in this respect must appear nonsensical. He relics for the unity altogether on that civilisation and culture which enabled twenty-five thousand people to witness a theatrical performance, at the same time in ancient Athens, a unity which ho considers was the greatest political outcome of the Hellenic constitution, and could only have had its origin in those beautiful political institutions that poisoned Socrates ostracised Thernistocles, and deified morethan one demagogue. There, need be no surprise at/Sir George’s affection for the .institutions of ancient Athens. Above all

others they offered political - rewards to gentlemen like Sir George Gkey, and encouraged ingratitude to those thorough statesmanship and care for the interests of the State benefited their country. V , ' Sir George was good; enough, to atfarm that separation would necessarily have a beneficial effect on the public credit of the colony, and ’ supported his affirmation by saying that with separation we should become equal to the Oap'e Colony, or which latter he drew a picture more creditable to his powers of imagination than to his conception of absolute fact. If thosel grounds did not prevail with members to induce them to accept separation, he procceeded to point out that the colony must rapidly sink into a state of barbarism, .its inhabitants being merely likely to be prevented from going as far as the cannibalism formerly practised by the Maoris by the instincts of the AngloSaxon race. All we can say to these assertions is, that if the House and the country will accept separation on such grounds they deserve to lose all the benefits of civilisation. We think our readers will agree with us that it was no harm that, after all this nonsense, the leader of the Opposition towards the close of his speech fairly threw off the mask, and stated plainly what his intentions were. After all the turmoil of a general election, he wants another appeal to the people, and precludes any discussion as to the justice of such an appeal being granted, by holding out a threat that unless it is granted he will offer an implacable opposition to the Government measures —that he will use every parliamentary means to prevent their passing. If this does not mean a threat of factious opposition, then we have lost the ability of comprehending the English language. We shall doubtless be accused by Sir George of misunderstanding him. It is his misfortune to be .always misunderstood, and the experience of last session has shown us that it is one thing to profess to understand English, and quite another thing to profess to understand anything Sir George Grey say?, judging by the meaning ordinarily ascribed to words. For Sir George has a habit of finding out that no one can understand him but himself. We are content, therefore, - to leave his utterances to be judged by each reader’s understanding, satisfied that they will come to conclusions similar to those we have arrived at. Sir George Grey’s proposals are in a word, even on the face of them, quite visionary. He proposes to destroy, without endeavoring to buildup. Last night, as the Premier very properly observed, he did not give the merest indication or outline of the manner in which he proposed to carry on the Government of the colony supposing his resolutions to be adopted. The Government act in a totally different manner. Every measure which they consider a necessary sequence of abolition is now before the House or the country. No one can accuse them of concealment or reticence, even in the most minute portion of the form of government which they put forward to replace provincialism. But Sir George and his following simply ask us to abolish everything, and to substitute nothing. They want the House and the country to take a leap in the dark; and .the leap will not be taken.